Why am I 'in' when Digambar 'out' with similar charges?: Churchill

GOANEWS DESK, PANAJI | 20 August 2015 16:59 IST

“Why two set of rules for me and Digambar Kamat when both of us are tightly accused as co-conspirators with similar incidents?”

“Why should I also be not bailed out by applying ‘rule of parity’, since Digambar Kamat was granted anticipatory bail?”

“Even I don’t have a single criminal case against me for the last 20 years and I am also not in power for over two years.”

These were the arguments made by former PWD minister Churchill Alemao before the special judge in the CBI court at Goa today, citing the order based on which Kamat was granted bail.

He has made a fresh plea to grant him bail.

Special judge B P Deshpande, who had granted anticipatory bail to Kamat and rejected Alemao’s bail plea, will deliver his order next Monday, 24 August.

Till then, his judicial custody has been extended by 14 more days.

Shrikant Shivade, a senior lawyer from Mumbai, argued Alemao’s case today, stating that his bail plea should be heard in the ‘change of circumstances.’

Adv Rajiv Gomes, while arguing for the crime branch, however countered it, stating that no circumstances have changed in last three days, before which Alemao’s bail plea was rejected.

Adv Shivade however argued that Section 41-A of CrPC, based on which Kamat was granted bail, applies more to Alemao since he was interrogated before arrest, then arrested, interrogated in the police custody and even house and office was searched.

“They could find nothing. And now they don’t require Alemao in police custody, due to which he is in the judicial custody”, argued Adv Shivade.

 

He however mainly harped upon rule of parity, citing similar charges applied for both, both called main conspirators and similar incidents quoted for both while applying same charges to them.

When facts and evidences are similar, both the accused should either sail together or sink together”, he argued.

In fact, he pointed out, Kamat has two additional charges against him – holding photo copy of the missing file and trying to influence his position to get false information under RTI.

“Alemao’s case is better than Kamat to get a bail”, said Adv Shivade, while also countering the crime branch claim that he was a habitual offender.

Citing Supreme Court judgement that habitual offender needs to have been convicted minimum thrice, he said Alemao does not have a single criminal charge against him in the last 20 years and he has been acquitted in earlier cases.

“In fact my case is better than Digambar Kamat”, Adv Shivade argued on behalf of Alemao.

Countering this, Adv Gomes however said no circumstances have changed from the time Alemao’s bail was rejected.  

He also brought to the notice of the court that the crime branch had cited reasons in the case diary to justify Alemao’s arrest, which was not done in Kamat’s case.

“We need more time to investigate and interrogate Alemao”, said Adv Gomes. 

Drop a comment

Enter The Code Displayed hereRefresh Image


Latest News

Scams